In various forms of networked or otherwise distributed data processing systems, complex and/or multiple related processes are often routed to multiple computing resources for execution. For example, in financial and other trading systems, orders for purchases, sales, and other transactions in financial interests are often routed to multiple market or exchange servers for fulfillment. For example, when a large order is routed to multiple exchanges (e.g., based on the liquidity available in each market), orders tend to arrive at the faster exchanges (i.e., those having fewer inherent latencies) before they arrive at slower exchanges (i.e., those having greater inherent latencies), and thus show in the books of different exchanges at different times. When orders begin to show on the books of the faster exchanges, other parties can detect the orders and attempt to take advantage of the latency in slower exchanges by cancelling, changing, and or otherwise manipulating quotes (e.g., bids and offers) or other market parameters on the slower exchanges, effectively increasing the implicit trading costs. As a result, orders that may have otherwise executed on any single exchange at a high fill ratio tend to exhibit a lower overall fill ratio when routed to multiple exchanges as a split trade.
Prior art documents, such as the Rony Kay article “Pragmatic Network Latency Engineering”, Fundamental Facts and Analysis, have attempted to address such problems by proposing elimination of one-way communications (i.e., “packet”) latencies. Such systems fail to address arbitrage opportunities and other issues caused or facilitated by variations in the time required for multiple processors to execute individual portions of multiple-processor execution requests (i.e., execution latencies), in addition to (or as part of) communications latencies.